Rebellion Sues Over Rebellion
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Okay. Either I'm missing something, or these people are just really dull. How is anyone confusing an the name of a game expansion, for a game that's been out for years, for the of a game company same name or not?
This is ridiculous. If I saw a game called Blizzard I wouldn't instantly assume Blizzard Entertainment was being narcissistic and made a game named after themselves.
I hope Rebellion loses.
WHY IS EVERYONE SO FUCKING STUPID.
This is ridiculous. If I saw a game called Blizzard I wouldn't instantly assume Blizzard Entertainment was being narcissistic and made a game named after themselves.
I hope Rebellion loses.
WHY IS EVERYONE SO FUCKING STUPID.
Rebellion, because you own Mongoose - who are a pretty decent pen and paper RPG publisher - I should like you. But now I am an inch away from trademarking the term "indie developer" as well as a comprehensive collection of pronouns, articles and letters, calling my lawyer and going to town on your arses.
A small mistake on that. It wasn't Edge Magazine, it was Tim Langdrell, the owner of Edge Games and notorious patent troll. In the incident with Edge Magazine in fact, the judge reamed out Langdrell for presenting false evidence.Mcoffey said:
Since no other discussion is required, I'll put up tardock Entertainment's game up to show you how epic it is.
<youtube=uG8r2gsbAwg>
<youtube=uG8r2gsbAwg>
I hope this is like the Scrolls case where the company is only sueing because it has to for some reason.
This is so fuckin' retarded. How can someone patent words. It's the name of the game, not the name of the company. There's no chance in hell they win the case.
If I'm not mistaken the way the law deals with trademark issues a failure to attempt to protect ones trademark even if a case is piss poor can be held against a person or company in future cases where there may be real infringement. Rebellion finds themselves between a rock and a hard place, either file an expensive and unpopular suit or all but loose claim to their trademark.
Slightly different circumstances, but I agree on the count that it's not going to work here.Mcoffey said:
That's bad. Just bad.DVS BSTrD said:
...Besides, I was TOTALLY going to use it.
Rebellion Studios really has no chance of winning this by any means except attempting simply drag the matter out. Trademarks come in four strengths:
1. Generic: These have no protection so you can't have Milk brand milk
2. Description: These have weak protection, so a game about a rebellion being named Rebellion.
3. Arbitrary: These can have very strong protection as long as you can show that the term has nothing to do with the market your products are in, but it does not give you rights to anything that is considered a generic use of the term. Apple Computers falls into this category because apples have nothing to do with computers excluding of course, the arbitrary brand of computers known as Apples. That does not however give Apple any right to sue Granny Smith Apples as that mark exists in a completely different market where the term is descriptive.
4. Fanciful: If you make up a word and use that as you're name you're very well protected. This means that Exxon could come after you if you tried to sell Exxon Oranges even though Exxon certainly doesn't sell oranges.
In this case Rebellion Studio's name is arbitrary, but it makes the mistake of using a word that has already been associated with numerous gaming titles, such as "Star Wars: Rebellion". They would be hard pressed to show that their studio's name acquired a strong secondary meaning that the use of the descriptive term "rebellion" somehow damages, as such they have no case.
Also kudos on the captcha for this wonderful insight, "reduplicated phrases", well said.
1. Generic: These have no protection so you can't have Milk brand milk
2. Description: These have weak protection, so a game about a rebellion being named Rebellion.
3. Arbitrary: These can have very strong protection as long as you can show that the term has nothing to do with the market your products are in, but it does not give you rights to anything that is considered a generic use of the term. Apple Computers falls into this category because apples have nothing to do with computers excluding of course, the arbitrary brand of computers known as Apples. That does not however give Apple any right to sue Granny Smith Apples as that mark exists in a completely different market where the term is descriptive.
4. Fanciful: If you make up a word and use that as you're name you're very well protected. This means that Exxon could come after you if you tried to sell Exxon Oranges even though Exxon certainly doesn't sell oranges.
In this case Rebellion Studio's name is arbitrary, but it makes the mistake of using a word that has already been associated with numerous gaming titles, such as "Star Wars: Rebellion". They would be hard pressed to show that their studio's name acquired a strong secondary meaning that the use of the descriptive term "rebellion" somehow damages, as such they have no case.
Also kudos on the captcha for this wonderful insight, "reduplicated phrases", well said.
You know, I couldn't find a live Trademark on behalf of Rebellion in the TESS search via the US Patent and Trademark Office. I could be wrong and I could have missed it, but I searched under various permutations they have called themselves and found none.At_The_Gates said:
However, even in the case that they have registered their trademark, there are other factors at play (the main reason I looked). One of the problems Edge had (aside from Langdell failing to establish proof of use of his trademarks) was the broad nature of his trademarks. Usually, these do not hold. You could probably get a trademark on paper for the word "the" if you tried hard enough, but you would never, ever, ever enforce it ((legally; you can still threaten people and maybe get something there).